Christiane Amanpour (3:50)

You would try to do that better if you had.

Jamie Rubin (3:52)

I would. No. Or I would ask for. I would ask. That would be my request to government because. And if I was. Yes, I would. I would. And then the other thing I do, because it directly affected me and it pissed me off, you know, the Biden administration before that, the Trump administration before that, the Obama administration essentially didn't parcel out in a regular way principles, as you call them, the president, the vice president, the secretaries of this.

Christiane Amanpour (4:20)

You never interviewed a sitting president.

Jamie Rubin (4:22)

Never interviewed a sitting president. But what happens is they say, oh, the Sunday shows. So, you know, we'll have the Secretary of State on one Sunday show and.

Christiane Amanpour (4:32)

Then you had a Sunday show and you never.

Jamie Rubin (4:34)

I barely got anybody. Honestly. Honestly. Well, we don't want to talk about that Sunday show because it was not my finest hour.

Christiane Amanpour (4:40)

But it was partly my fault because the Obama people hated me so much.

Jamie Rubin (4:45)

No, no. Yeah, but I actually did get Nancy Pelosi when she was.

Christiane Amanpour (4:49)

No, but why? You didn't get Obama when you were.

Jamie Rubin (4:51)

Yeah, but you know what? They were never going to give. They had never. I'd never have Clinton. I didn't have Biden, I didn't have anybody. They didn't all hate you.

Christiane Amanpour (5:00)

You had Clinton from Sarajevo.

Jamie Rubin (5:02)

Yeah, but that was. That was a press conference. But I did. Nancy Pelosi gave me an exclusive interview for my first where she was House speaker and it was really great. But apart from that. No. Just one other thing. I would say that I believe presidents miss an opportunity by not having consistent, long in depth, interesting quote unquote fireside chats. They just don't. And they should.

Christiane Amanpour (5:28)

All right. How about one other thing, though? I remember that we once talked if you ever had to leave your work, that you would have been one of the greatest special envoys for women for the United States government. If that chance had ever come, you would have been great at that.

Jamie Rubin (5:48)

Well, there are many, many others who've been excellent. But I would like to do what I can. I do do what I can in my work to promote just ordinary women's stories and their rights and things. And of course, I hate this anti DEI thing, as you can imagine. I'm like, hang on a second. Just because she's a woman and she's commander of naval forces or just because she's a woman and she's done umpteen combat air sorties and just because she's a woman, she's a great scientist or a great doctor or a great artist or whatever it might be. Oh, we're going to fire them. And not only that, we're going to destroy all their record and not talk about them anymore.

Christiane Amanpour (6:26)

Number two, what can a concerned US or first world citizen like myself, this is from Jilly on email and pretty much all of my friends and family do to actually help end the war in Gaza. Is there anything we can do?

Jamie Rubin (6:40)

Well, you can answer. Here's, here's my perspective as a citizen and not as a journalist because when I was at college, I did go on demonstrations like I remember us out of El Salvador and, and, and anti apartheid stuff and this, I did do that, anti nuclear weapons, you know, the CND marches and all of that. And I do think citizen participation actually is very, very important. And I am struck by how little of it there is now. And even when there is citizen participation, whether it's in, let's say in the United States in this case, it barely gets covered if it's against the Trump administration because people are just trying to hide under the, you know, hope this storm will pass and not to bring any negative attention by this administration to them. But I do think that just like, you know, citizens around the world, especially in the west, allies of South Africa, their citizens did stand up and say once and for all, you know, apartheid was an evil, discriminatory situation and a minority could not continue to rule and dominate a majority as was going on in South Africa. And eventually there was a peaceful end to it all. So I do wish that there would be more citizen involvement in Standing up for the rights of ordinary people, whether in Israel or in the Palestinian territories, and most particularly those who are starving in Gaza right now, who are being chased out of their homes.

Christiane Amanpour (8:07)

Let me take a crack at that. Clearly, the ticket to change in Gaza is to change Netanyahu's position. There's only two ways to do that. Either the politics of Israel have to change such that there's a few people who, if they resign from the Likud Party, the government would fall and an election would take place. And that would, I believe, yield a change that would change the willingness of the government to allow the people to not be starving in Gaza. Secondly, to pressure Trump, Trump can do this. Trump can get Netanyahu to change his policy to prevent the starvation of Gaza. So anything anyone can do, through a friend, through money, through whatever, to get to Donald Trump to just tell him, forget everything else you've admitted, they're starving. Get Netanyahu to feed these people. And I think citizens can do that.

Jamie Rubin (9:08)

I do, too. And pictures had the effect. So journalists were able to make Donald Trump say what he said, that, that you can't fake, that those children are hungry. And I do believe that, you know, there's so many platforms now that citizens have access to that he's actually on. He's engaged on social media and, and, you know, he's engaged on all the platforms that, that, you know, that could have an effect. So I agree with you there. But, Jamie, how about Paul on email? It's a little bit of a follow up from Jilly's question. Yes, the recent he says speculation by US Universities, I think capitulation by US Universities to Trump's administration is beginning to have an Orwellian feel to it. What's your comment on Col University agreeing to the definition of anti Semitism being any criticism of Israel? Firstly, Jamie, do you know whether they've agreed to that?

Christiane Amanpour (10:00)

No, I think that's an overstatement. But certainly they've bought into the idea that the statements about Israel and criticism of Israel's policies were somehow perceived as anti Semitism. There were a few, I think we talked about this, extreme positions that were taken that tried to say that sort of thing. But no, Colombia hasn't agreed to that. But they have capitulated. They have accepted oversight of their, you know, Middle East Institute and oversight of their, you know, actions on anti Semitism. Protecting against that way too far. And I know Claire Shipman a bit. I kind of understand what she was doing. A billion dollars in funding for Colombia was at stake. But they went too far. They were too accepting of this criticism of their, their university, which handled it badly. But the idea that you can't criticize Israel without being called an anti Semite is, is abhorrent to me. I'm a Jewish American. My whole life I've had, you know, very, very strong views about Israel. I used to fight with people who didn't understand why Israel did what it did, certainly when it was an underdog all the way to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. But right now, Israel's government is behaving in a way that deserves criticism from everyone. They're allowing the people of Gaza to starve and they can fix it. That's not anti Semitism, that's just caring about the people, the Palestinians. And I think that Colombia should be ashamed of itself if it's going to not be willing to allow students to protest against what Israel's doing to the people of Gaza. That's a legitimate protest.

Jamie Rubin (11:55)

Yes. And I tell you what, of course it's a legitimate protest. And anything that does not include violence or hate speech is by and large legitimate protests. They're trying to get a billion dollars from UCLA as well. That's not a private university or an Ivy League, that's a public university. But if you go back and look at, and I think I advise everybody, if they can listen to an interview that was done in the New York Times audio with a guy called Curtis Yavin who is one of quote unquote intellects behind MAGA philosophy and Project 2025. And they have had a long time plan to defund and defang elite, so called elite Ivy League universities. And so this is not just about anti Semitism. And that's why it's so, you know, specious a lot of it. It goes beyond making sure anti Semitism doesn't exist.

Christiane Amanpour (12:51)

It's a culture war.

Jamie Rubin (12:52)

It's a culture war. Exactly. And it's having a very bad effect on America's preeminent position in education around the world and its research and health and, and, and science and all of that because there so many programs are being defunded in this, in this, I think false claim that all of this is in the name of anti Semitism. It's a cover for what they want to do. Winning the culture war.

Christiane Amanpour (13:20)

Foreign.

Jamie Rubin (13:28)

Let's go on to Jacob on YouTube who asks Jamie, can you explain some of the possible details of what a two state solution in Israel might consist of based on past frameworks, government, land rights, policing, voting rights, represent representation, etcetera.

Christiane Amanpour (13:43)

Yes, I can. It will resemble very, very closely what Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat discussed at Camp David in the year 2000. It will involve two states side by side with conditions about the Palestinian state that's created that the Palestinian Authority has now. And they told me this first, last November or December, they're willing to accept conditions that are all the reasonable conditions. Israelis could want a demilitarized state, no Hamas, no payments to families who commit terrorism. All of the legitimate requirements. It will have a capital in Jerusalem and part of Jerusalem would be a capital of the Palestinian state. 100% of the land of the west bank and Gaza can be returned with some swaps. That's doable. Still, if they were determined the refugee part of the equation can be resolved through a fair settlement. And these parameters that Clinton negotiated in 2000 and early in 2001 in his final days are going to be the two state solution. It's all there. It's on paper. All the Arafat said no. You know, I say this because it's important. All the people around him who are now the leaders of the Palestinian Authority wanted him to say yes. Now all we need is someone with the bravery of Ehud Barak who, who was willing to do that in 2000. And we need an Israeli leader who wants to achieve the goal of Israel's founders, peace and security and acceptance by all its neighbors. Saudi Arabia is ready to do it if the Israelis will just set that path forward to a Palestinian state.

Jamie Rubin (15:36)

Yeah, I would just add Yitzhak Rabin, who is assassinated for trying to do just that. Obviously, Ehud Olmert also tried and it hasn't worked. But I would say one thing and I'd refer you to an article somebody, Miller, I can't remember her first name. She's a professor of these issues at Northeastern University and she has written a very, again, a cautionary tale and a reminder about negotiations and about the two state solution. I think at some point, maybe the title said the Myth of the Two State Solution. I think what she's saying is that even in the best of times, when negotiations were well underway and where it did seem like there could be breakthroughs in reservations resolving this situation for the good of both sides, that unfortunately the Palestinian. Well, yes, Israeli governments backed by the United States kept building settlements. No matter what the US Said to them, they kept doing it. But more to the point, even the United States and of course the Israeli government, they were in the leading position. They were the, the top dog. So to Speak. The Palestinians have always been the second class citizens in all of this, at least the way they're treated in negotiations. And the Palestinians, this, this professor was pointing out and I' it in my reporting, and I'm sure Jamie can attest to it too, have always had to do over and above. And the Israelis are like, okay, if you do this and if you do that, and then we might consider, and it's only a holding pattern and this and that. So the Palestinians recognized Israel under the Oslo. They did all the things that were asked of them in the early years of Oslo until it went belly up after 2000. And if you look at the system, a lot of the onus was on the weaker party in terms of weaker in terms of rights and facts on the ground. And I remember talking after October 7th to, I believe it was Sir John Sawyers, former MI5 and former UK Ambassador to the UN and very big advisor to then Prime Minister Blair on national security. He said, if you look at things like South Africa or Northern Ireland or indeed now, you know, Israel and Palestine, often it's incumbent on the more powerful force to make a move, to make a gesture, to be the first to.

Christiane Amanpour (18:01)

And that's what Ehud Barak did. Yes, he did that.

Jamie Rubin (18:05)

Yes. But he did. Right. That was a terrible missed opportunity. I understand what you're saying and I believe I agree with you on there. But in general, even under the great Yitzhak Rabin, they were building settlements apace and they think it's clever and they think it's politics and they think it's leverage. But look where it's got now you have these people, many of whom should we just say were not unhappy that Rabin was killed.

Christiane Amanpour (18:32)

Let me just say John Sawyers knows a lot about a lot of things, but Nelson Mandela was the weaker party and he showed the dignity and brilliance of the weaker party, saying, I don't want revenge, I want the white people. And so it's not. It's a combination of having a unique, powerful personality and, and the pressure building. We're going to need, you know, three people, an American president, an Israeli leader and a new Palestinian leader. And then I still think it could happen.

Jamie Rubin (19:06)

Okay, but you know, just one other thing. Nelson Mandela, you're absolutely right, was the magnanimous. But it was FW De Klerk who was the powerful party, who even agreed to start these negotiations. That's what I mean. Do you know what I mean?

Christiane Amanpour (19:19)

Absolutely. But Nelson Mandela did the extra mile. He was the one who showed no revenge.

Jamie Rubin (19:25)

Yes, he was a brilliant politician, a brilliant people person, and hugely pragmatic.

Christiane Amanpour (19:32)

All right, number six, people often discuss Biden's declining health, but has anyone suggested that Trump may be sundowning when he is engaging in these late night bizarre rants on Truth Social? What do you think about that?

Jamie Rubin (19:46)

I think that many people do suggest that, and I think that some of the ramblings deserve to be dissected for what they are. Yeah. So the answer is people are doing it. But he did win the presidency and nobody was doing it before.

Christiane Amanpour (20:02)

You know, the greatest line that I gave Biden's people during the debate before he spectacularly failed, when they were saying to Biden, you know, he needed to take a cognitive test, I told them to say at the debate, well, I'll take a cognitive test. If Donald Trump takes a lie detector test, they never use that one.

Jamie Rubin (20:29)

All right, I think we should go to Joshua on Instagram. What lessons from your diplomatic career do you think are being forgotten or ignored by today's policymaker makers? And Jamie, let's just add Caitlin on Instagram because it's quite similar. How do you see the relationship between journalism and diplomacy evolving in today's information war era? They're inevitably linked because one's about the policy, the other's about the messaging.

Christiane Amanpour (20:53)

Here's what I think is very interesting. We talked, I think it was last week, about the difference between Henry Kissinger negotiating peace and Tony Blinken or now Rubio or Trump. How the world has changed. Back in the day when there were powerful leaders and democracy was still growing, it was possible for a few individuals to negotiate a peace agreement with the. With in secret, with very little outside involvement. I think what we've learned because of information, because of the democratization of our societies, because there are more democracies, because there are usually factions in all of these cases, I think we have to be a lot more creative in realizing that there isn't some way to go into a back room and solve all these things. I think we have to realize that. That negotiating a successful peace agreement requires the power of educating the populace in these countries. I always say that we forget that Zelensky doesn't have the total power to do whatever he wants. The people of Ukraine are the deciders. Putin may be able to do whatever he wants, but Zelensky has to listen to his people. And so we have to find a way to put together the power of information, the power of social media to change the views of people about the other, to force a recognition that all these different Things have to come into play. Economics, politics, war, you know, verification and attitudes and values. And that's the new wave of diplomacy and foreign affairs is to put all those pieces together and just to say.

Jamie Rubin (22:46)

On Zelenskyy, of course there's martial law that was that he imposed in Ukraine for many, many reasons. So, yes, they do have a big say, the people of Ukraine, much bigger than in Russia, as you said. But there's certain things that he, he can do by trying to, you know, in terms of managing the war. But here's a final one from Kai on Instagram. How has the rise of social media and citizen journalism changed the role of traditional foreign correspondence? So again, I always remember Zelenskyy taking his own little iPhone and doing a selfie the. The night of the invasion and saying, basically, I'm not going anywhere, I'm not running. We, I think he said, we are here and we will fight. And that was the beginning of his war.

Christiane Amanpour (23:28)

Showed some. And he was amazing.

Jamie Rubin (23:30)

Yeah, it was a moment that it could have gone either way that night. It could have gone either way. And in that instant, his instinct kicked in and his advisors and him and they said, we are going to show that we're here and we're not capitulating. So how is, you know, the related question of rise of social media? Well, I've been, Kai, sort of juggling and battling with this for a long time because this has been going on for a while, social media, citizen journalism, probably for the last two decades. And so much of it thinking that they can sit in and take over from where we foreign correspondents work, traditional foreign correspondence. You know, there's nothing that can be better than being there in the field. And I believe that too much of social media and citizen journalism is armchair done from.

Christiane Amanpour (24:19)

And amateurs.

Jamie Rubin (24:21)

Yes, yes, there are many, many who are now very professional because again, because of the traditional networks and the traditional framework of journalism is beginning to die off. Many more individuals, some have come from, you know, journalistic organizations are now taking their journalism to social media. But I think we get draft one from, you know, from citizen journalism who might be in the location and they maybe raise the alarm or point us in directions that we hadn't thought of, but I don't think they are and they can't be all of journalism because we have certain rules, regulations, experience. It's a craft, it's something we've worked at for a long time to try to perfect and do to the best of our ability with all the, you know, accountability that goes with it. As well and the fact checking. So I think that it's citizen journalism and social media are an added layer, but they can't take over from the effect of traditional foreign correspondence. And I would also add that more and more now social media anyway pedals and lies, disinformation and conspiracy theories. So you really have to go to places that you really trust and that have, as we've said before, the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. Not literally, but you know what I mean. Tried true tested organizations that have a legacy.

Christiane Amanpour (25:45)

I agree with everything you said.

Jamie Rubin (25:50)

Thank you all for listening to the bonus episode of the X Files with me, Christiane Amanpour and Jamie. And remember, if you have a question for us, just send it in and we will answer. Remember, we're@amanpourpodlobal.com our handle is @amanpourpod. Our next episode is out on on Tuesday. Wherever you get your podcast, remember you can listen for free at Global Player. You can download that from the App Store or go to globalplayer.com and that's that for us. This Thursday's bonus episode. Signing out. Bye bye Goodbye.

Christiane Amanpour (26:30)

This is a Global Player original podcast.

C (26:34)

Tired of spills and stains on your sofa? WashablesOfAs.com has your back featuring the Annabe Collection, the only designer sofa that's machine washable inside and out. Where designer quality meets budget friendly prices. That's right, sofas start at just $699. Enjoy a no risk experience with pet friendly stain resistant and changeable slipcovers made with performance fabric experience cloud like comfort with high resilience foam that's hypoallergenic and never needs fluffing. The sturdy steel frame ensures longevity and the modular pieces can be rearranged anytime. Check out washablesofas.com and get up to 60% off your annabe sofa backed by a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. If you're not absolutely in love, send it back for a full refund. No return shipping or restocking fees. Every penny back Upgrade now@washablesofas.com Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.